H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Agnieszka Radwanska vs Anastasia Rodionova H2H: 1-0
Agnieszka Radwanska holds a 1–0 lead over Anastasia Rodionova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Agnieszka Radwanska leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Agnieszka Radwanska won the 2013 Doha third round 6-3 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
POL
Age 37
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 2013* | Doha | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Agnieszka Radwanska | 6-3 6-2 | Anastasia Rodionova | Match data |
* Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable.
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agnieszka Radwanska | #74 | #2 | 8,530 | 2,081 | 506 | 237 | 68.1% | 0 | 5 | 1 | 8 | 6 | 20 |
| Anastasia Rodionova | #872 | #62 | 1,095 | 1,649 | 86 | 150 | 36.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Career Progression by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. GS and Titles are cumulative career totals through that season.
| Age | Agnieszka Radwanska | Anastasia Rodionova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2006 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2007 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #26 | 1,808 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #239 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2008 | 51–19 | 72.9% | #10 | 1,926 | 0 | 4 | 2001 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #195 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 44–23 | 65.7% | #10 | 1,910 | 0 | 4 | 2002 | 5–3 | 62.5% | #118 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 32–18 | 64.0% | #14 | 1,860 | 0 | 4 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #165 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 46–18 | 71.9% | #8 | 1,979 | 0 | 7 | 2004 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #212 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2012 | 59–19 | 75.6% | #4 | 1,994 | 0 | 10 | 2005 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #140 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2013 | 56–20 | 73.7% | #5 | 1,957 | 0 | 13 | 2006 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #94 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2014 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #6 | 1,872 | 0 | 14 | 2007 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #78 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2015 | 50–22 | 69.4% | #5 | 1,957 | 0 | 17 | 2008 | 8–20 | 28.6% | #98 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2016 | 51–18 | 73.9% | #3 | 1,942 | 0 | 20 | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #95 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2017 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #28 | 1,812 | 0 | 20 | 2010 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #64 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2018 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #74 | 1,727 | 0 | 20 | 2011 | 8–21 | 27.6% | #108 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #139 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #162 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #185 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #235 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #797 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #390 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |